WAYNE SIMEON and REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Case [2009] AATA 581


Administrative Appeals Tribunal

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2009] AATA 581

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No   2008/0547

VETERANS'      APPEALS        DIVISION )
Re WAYNE SIMEON

Applicant

And

REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Mr John Handley, Senior Member

Date5 August 2009  

PlaceMelbourne

Decision

 The decision under review made by the Veterans’ Review Board with respect to the condition of hypertension is affirmed.  The decision insofar as is concerned Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and alcohol dependence is set aside and in substitution it is decided that those conditions are war-caused.

1.       The application is remitted to the respondent for assessment of pension in accordance with these reasons.

..............................................

John Handley
  Senior Member

CATCHWORDS – veterans’ entitlements – applicant served in South Vietnam; observed a body, apparently executed, tied to a cairn on side of a roadway; when driving a truck with 8 tonnes of crushed rock its brakes failed when on an incline; whether events occurred; whether they constitute category 1A and/or 1B stressors; PTSD, alcohol dependence and abuse war-caused; decision set aside.

Mines v Repatriation Commission [2004] FCA 1331

Repatriation Commission v Deledio (1998) 49 ALD 193

REASONS FOR DECISION

Mr John Handley, Senior Member           

2.       The applicant is presently 60 years of age and was previously a member of the Australian Army.  He claims acceptance of the conditions of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder or Major Depressive Disorder and Alcohol Dependence as war‑caused.  Claims for acceptance of those conditions were rejected by the respondent and affirmed by the Veterans' Review Board (VRB). 

3.       It was the case of the applicant that the conditions for which he now seeks acceptance arose out of stressful incidents whilst he served in South Vietnam (SVN) between 24 September 1970 and 19 August 1971.  He was then serving as a truck driver in the Transport Division of the 1st Field Squadron of the Royal Australian Engineers at Nui Dat.  The applicant presently receives 90 per cent of General Rate pension having regard to a number of other accepted disabilities, one of which is hypertension and which was challenged in these proceedings by the respondent.  That is to say, it sought by these proceedings to have a finding made that the condition of hypertension should not have been accepted as war‑caused.

4.       The applicant relied on two stressors in service being the sight of a deceased person on the side of a roadway approximately three months after arriving in SVN and, on another occasion, the brakes of a truck failing when he was carrying eight tonnes of crushed rock. 

5.       The applicant said that he is presently employed as a cleaner and a relief cook at the Barham Hospital.  He grew up in Barham in southern New South Wales and participated in sports and other recreations.  He said he was a sociable person.  He left school at the age of 15 and worked with his father who was self employed as a drycleaner.  At the age of 19 he obtained employment at the local hospital…

Continue reading WAYNE SIMEON and REPATRIATION COMMISSION

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
WAYNE SIMEON and REPATRIATION COMMISSION [2009] AATA 581
Case
[2009] AATA 581
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant, Wayne Simeon, filed an appeal against the Repatriation Commission, challenging their decision regarding his eligibility for veterans' benefits. Simeon, a former serviceman who served in South Vietnam, claimed that he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and alcohol dependence as a result of his military service. The Commission denied his claims, leading him to seek judicial review of their decision. The case was heard in the Federal Court of Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the applicant's claimed conditions were war-caused and, if so, whether they met the criteria for category 1A or 1B stressors. The court had to determine the factual occurrences of the events that Simeon alleged as the cause of his PTSD and alcohol dependence, and whether those events constituted the requisite stressors. The court also needed to establish if Simeon's PTSD and alcohol dependence were indeed war-caused.

The court examined the evidence presented and found that the applicant's claims of having witnessed an apparently executed body tied to a cairn, as well as the incident involving his truck's brakes failing on an incline, were credible. The court concluded that these events qualified as category 1A and 1B stressors, respectively, which are necessary to establish a causal link between the applicant's conditions and his military service. As a result, the court determined that the applicant's PTSD and alcohol dependence were indeed war-caused. The court found the Commission's decision to be incorrect in this regard and set it aside.

The court affirmed the decision made by the Veterans' Review Board concerning the applicant's hypertension, finding that it was not war-caused. However, the court ordered that the application be remitted to the respondent for reassessment of the pension in light of the findings regarding PTSD and alcohol dependence. The court ruled that these conditions were war-caused, and as such, the applicant was entitled to the appropriate benefits.

Orders

Orders of the court

The decision under review made by the Veterans’ Review Board with respect to the condition of hypertension is affirmed. The decision insofar as is concerned Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and alcohol dependence is set aside and in substitution it is decided that those conditions are war-caused.

1. The application is remitted to the respondent for assessment of pension in accordance with these reasons.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.